If there is one situation that I would say stimulates an abundant amount of stress, it would be busy and large parking lots. Like Sam's Club on a Saturday afternoon. There is people with enormous grocery carts- few at a time, inpatient pedestrians, inattentive drivers; the entire lot is a generator of chaos. It is a place of activity that is ripe for potential accidents. It is a position of hazard. Yet, it is something that most, Americans that I know any way, find themselves a part of. They too, are contributors to the derangement of the parking lot. Us, vulnerable little beings, find our way into these times of utter peril. But what for? In order to get enough food for the evening party? Of the class fundraiser? The super bowl? Whatever have you, the risk is worth it apparently, considering the circumstances.
Why do we put ourselves in stressful situations? Unless you're one who considers them self able to handle the madness, then I would assume it wouldn't make much of a difference whether it would be classified as a stressful situation or not. Yet, most people don't come off as ones to handle the stress of certain situations. They become rude, inconsiderate, and care about only what they need to do, those are ones that I think plant the little seed of chaos. And it spreads faster than any wild fire or contagious disease known to man. It is possible to be in a busy place, to be efficient, and get things done in a timely manner without causing stress. I think it is a choice that one has to make. (This kind of falls back on the whole being in control of emotions idea.)
True, stressful situations aren't necessarily always avoidable, nor containable. Those are the times that we need to find ourselves in the utter most control of our reactions and not just go off of instinct. The initial instinct of one would lead to anxiety, and anxiety is a state that is the exact opposite of being relaxed.
Yet, how and why is it so difficult for us to just stay calm in a basket case of a place? How do we not acknowledge that getting upset because of a situation is not going to make it better? It seem like common sense doesn't it? The idea of making a situation better is to first make one's self better first. I don't think its possible to generate peace in a stressful situation when one isn't at peace them self. It comes off as being hypocritical. Which would in fact just lead to more frustration and distortion.
(Ironically enough I'm listening to "everything will be alright" by the killers while I'm writing this. And yes, my ipod is on shuffle, a sheer act of fate I would have to say. )
Now, as I mentioned before, one can't avoid stressful situations, they might even cause themselves some stress just trying to avoid it. But I don't think avoiding stress to the key to handling it. I think it's the perspective one needs in order to decide for them self that they don't need to be getting upset. If we all can just come to conclusion that getting frustrated about something isn't going to make it any better, maybe stressful situations would lessen, or become less of a stressful situation. Yet, as everything is, it is easier said then done.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
the hardest thing
The hardest thing is holding back tears when you desperately want to release them. Its the idea that you have to remain strong, that you have to refuse to show any sign of weakness. Its a painful thing, emotionally and physically. Emotionally and physically because crying is the intense blow and the passionate attack of an overwhelming emotion. Its the force of which that has the ability to knock one off their feet, to make one drop to their knees in a state of utter debilitation. Its almost an asthmatic sensation; sending the body all the clear signs of something that is wrong. It is a physical state that is equivalent of being ill. The almost unbearable choking and the closing of ones throat, like it suddenly has become very dry and swollen and even the tiniest breath is an excruciating contraction that pierces and makes even the toughest nerves defenseless against the pain. It seems to be easier to just hold ones breath, and in doing so one suddenly becomes light headed and unable to feel the pain because of the lack of oxygen getting to ones brain and with that last pleasant and painless thought one reaches a state of unconsciousness. Which immediately becomes reasonable solution, yet, limited. Limited because one cannot simply pass out instead of crying. Limited because that is avoiding the problem rather then facing it. Limited because quite frankly, it is not healthy. So one results to other things. Things that makes one feel numb, that dulls the pain to the point of bearable which happen to be just as unhealthy and avoiding. Yet nothing feels comforting, nothing is found to be capable of be ridding the deploring feelings. Its an infection that slowly and fiercely dissipates through out ones system, it consumes one in the absolute misery and one finds them self unable to function, unable to exist in a blithe state. Not only have the heart strings been pulled, but they've been tugged, yanked, jerked aggressively and abused to the point of distortion. They are snapped and frayed, just as a string of twine would be; impossible to repair back to perfection. One can still try to fight the action of crying its self, but the tears, the tears are able to creep past the strength, to slip by and steadily fall. Holding back is no longer obtainable and one gives in, letting them self be devoured by the hurt, the hurt that had been bottled up so tightly that it can only rush out, uncontrollable and truculent, making ones body heave violent hiccups, in attempt to liberate all the repulsive feelings in a rapid manner. The feeling is one of pure exhaustion once it is all over, it makes one feel anemic and pray that the circuit doesn't reoccur, that it won't be triggered by any characteristic to start the cycle over again.
Crying is the hardest thing to cope with. Though it certainly can display more rather then sheer anguish. Such as feeling out right frustration or genuine happiness generates tears. However, no version of crying is comparable to the one of feeling in utter peril.
Crying is the hardest thing to cope with. Though it certainly can display more rather then sheer anguish. Such as feeling out right frustration or genuine happiness generates tears. However, no version of crying is comparable to the one of feeling in utter peril.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
4:00 AM
What a time, four 0'clock in the morning. It's too late to be going to bed and too early to wake up. There must be something some what magical about such a time. If there is an average time a day that the majority of people are asleep at, I would have to say it would be 4 AM. But there is something special about this time of day. Like the things that happen at the time. I don't like to think of the bad things, I like to think of it as a time that nothing terrible happens. Now three in the morning, well that is a different situation, but I'm not getting into that now.I think what made me wonder so intently on such a time of day was the number of times I heard a song lyric consist of it.
Now why is it the musicians feel it is significant enough to put in the time of the morning, and specifically make it at four. I know that I personally am rarely up at that time of the day. What are they doing up at that time of day anyways? Now I know there is the exceptions of those who work odd hours and are up for their job, but for this purpose I am excluding those who qualify for such. No hard feelings I hope.
I don't exactly know what kind of conclusion I'm hoping to come up with in this post, it's mostly just a curiosity stricken thought. What is the symbolism of four in the morning- if there is any sort of symbolism at all. Maybe it has to do with being in a state of restlessness. If one cannot fall asleep or stay asleep, they would be up at four. And why wouldn't someone be able to get a good night's rest? Is it because their mind is refusing to shut down all the thoughts and concerns going through their brain? They can't sleep, they have something on their mind, something that's forbidding them to get some rest. Maybe news that has sent shock waves through their system, or another individual that could be inflicting pain, or even tremendous amounts of joy that they're just to happy to sleep. Something that they want to keep thinking about over and over again.
The mind is an incredible thing. Just one thought is able to keep one up at 4 in the morning, or perhaps it's not just one thought, but a string of occurrences with another. Some events that you just can't cope with or comprehend quite correctly. Something that bothers you.
Is that the conclusion I had been searching for? The symbolism for being up at four in the morning is because somethings on one's mind that they just don't know how to handle so they vigorously search for an answer and in doing so they refuse to let their brain have a break until they've come to a conclusion. So in fact, it is not the brain keeping one up, its the individual keeping the brain up, being persistent until something is clear or pure exhaustion. Whichever comes first.
So that is what the musician does to cope with that thought that is keeping them up. They write a song about it, and hope in doing so they can give ones self peace of mind and get rest. I wonder how long that takes...
Now why is it the musicians feel it is significant enough to put in the time of the morning, and specifically make it at four. I know that I personally am rarely up at that time of the day. What are they doing up at that time of day anyways? Now I know there is the exceptions of those who work odd hours and are up for their job, but for this purpose I am excluding those who qualify for such. No hard feelings I hope.
I don't exactly know what kind of conclusion I'm hoping to come up with in this post, it's mostly just a curiosity stricken thought. What is the symbolism of four in the morning- if there is any sort of symbolism at all. Maybe it has to do with being in a state of restlessness. If one cannot fall asleep or stay asleep, they would be up at four. And why wouldn't someone be able to get a good night's rest? Is it because their mind is refusing to shut down all the thoughts and concerns going through their brain? They can't sleep, they have something on their mind, something that's forbidding them to get some rest. Maybe news that has sent shock waves through their system, or another individual that could be inflicting pain, or even tremendous amounts of joy that they're just to happy to sleep. Something that they want to keep thinking about over and over again.
The mind is an incredible thing. Just one thought is able to keep one up at 4 in the morning, or perhaps it's not just one thought, but a string of occurrences with another. Some events that you just can't cope with or comprehend quite correctly. Something that bothers you.
Is that the conclusion I had been searching for? The symbolism for being up at four in the morning is because somethings on one's mind that they just don't know how to handle so they vigorously search for an answer and in doing so they refuse to let their brain have a break until they've come to a conclusion. So in fact, it is not the brain keeping one up, its the individual keeping the brain up, being persistent until something is clear or pure exhaustion. Whichever comes first.
So that is what the musician does to cope with that thought that is keeping them up. They write a song about it, and hope in doing so they can give ones self peace of mind and get rest. I wonder how long that takes...
Sunday, January 11, 2009
feelings // emotions
e⋅mo⋅tion
–noun
1.an affective state of consciousness in which joy, sorrow, fear, hate, or the like, is experienced, as distinguished from cognitive and volitional states of consciousness.
One morning in church, the pastor's sermon was about feelings and emotions. And in that, he said that we are supposed to have emotions, that they are a good thing to express, but we should not let our emotions control us. For example if you're upset about getting a C on a test, it is wrong to take it out on your little brother, because he was not the one to give you the C on your test. However, there is a fine line about not expressing emotions, and repressing them, or just shoving it down, is also wrong. He did mention that it is from one extreme to another. But I don't understand where the medium is. Are we supposed to smile at others, even though we're furious on the inside? No, that would be fake, I don't think that's right. I simply don't understand how exactly one can express their emotions by still staying in control of them. When I think control, I think not needing to express any emotion, wouldn't that make sense? If you were in control of your emotions you wouldn't feel the need to express them. But no, according to my pastor, that is not correct.
I think it would just be easier if there wasn't such a thing as emotion or feelings. So many complications would be eliminated if we didn't have to worry about how something would make one feel. So many times in my life do I quote the Ramones and think "I want to be a teenage lobotomy..."
The book The Giver kind of experiments with the idea of minimizing emotion, which today, most would consider inhumane. But is it really such a bad idea? Imagine not being able to experience hurt, or sadness, or anger- how would the world look today? Would there still be crime? Would we still need rules?
But in a way, that idea is going back to what my pastor was saying, how we need to be in control of our emotions. Is it possible to still be angry, but not to react in anger? I can't fathom it. I love the idea of it though, of being able to be so in control of my emotions that I can reduce the number of mistakes that I make, that I can be able to acknowledge the fact that I am sad, but still think rationally. I have no idea what that would look like though, so how do I attain in doing such?
I tend to repress my emotions, I do have a few people that I can talk to about something that's on my mind, but I don't make my problems public news. I would absolutely loathe that kind of attention, I look at it as my business, and only mine. I am very selective of who I can really talk to, but I don't think I'm an emotionless zombie around everyone else. I love to smile and laugh, and I can sympathize at most times, so I feel I am a relatively bearable person to be around. Yet, I could be completely off my rocker, who knows.
Maybe I'll have an epiphany, and suddenly everything will become clear. Or perhaps its only obtained from steady practice. Either way, my ability to understand the concept of being in control of my emotions is currently just a thought and not an action.
–noun
1.an affective state of consciousness in which joy, sorrow, fear, hate, or the like, is experienced, as distinguished from cognitive and volitional states of consciousness.
One morning in church, the pastor's sermon was about feelings and emotions. And in that, he said that we are supposed to have emotions, that they are a good thing to express, but we should not let our emotions control us. For example if you're upset about getting a C on a test, it is wrong to take it out on your little brother, because he was not the one to give you the C on your test. However, there is a fine line about not expressing emotions, and repressing them, or just shoving it down, is also wrong. He did mention that it is from one extreme to another. But I don't understand where the medium is. Are we supposed to smile at others, even though we're furious on the inside? No, that would be fake, I don't think that's right. I simply don't understand how exactly one can express their emotions by still staying in control of them. When I think control, I think not needing to express any emotion, wouldn't that make sense? If you were in control of your emotions you wouldn't feel the need to express them. But no, according to my pastor, that is not correct.
I think it would just be easier if there wasn't such a thing as emotion or feelings. So many complications would be eliminated if we didn't have to worry about how something would make one feel. So many times in my life do I quote the Ramones and think "I want to be a teenage lobotomy..."
The book The Giver kind of experiments with the idea of minimizing emotion, which today, most would consider inhumane. But is it really such a bad idea? Imagine not being able to experience hurt, or sadness, or anger- how would the world look today? Would there still be crime? Would we still need rules?
But in a way, that idea is going back to what my pastor was saying, how we need to be in control of our emotions. Is it possible to still be angry, but not to react in anger? I can't fathom it. I love the idea of it though, of being able to be so in control of my emotions that I can reduce the number of mistakes that I make, that I can be able to acknowledge the fact that I am sad, but still think rationally. I have no idea what that would look like though, so how do I attain in doing such?
I tend to repress my emotions, I do have a few people that I can talk to about something that's on my mind, but I don't make my problems public news. I would absolutely loathe that kind of attention, I look at it as my business, and only mine. I am very selective of who I can really talk to, but I don't think I'm an emotionless zombie around everyone else. I love to smile and laugh, and I can sympathize at most times, so I feel I am a relatively bearable person to be around. Yet, I could be completely off my rocker, who knows.
Maybe I'll have an epiphany, and suddenly everything will become clear. Or perhaps its only obtained from steady practice. Either way, my ability to understand the concept of being in control of my emotions is currently just a thought and not an action.
Friday, January 9, 2009
I can't believe that you actually died
Death is something that we all have experience dealing with. Perhaps dealing isn't the proper word, more so to handle I think. Nevertheless, we've all come across it, and there are numerous songs out there that reflect the feelings one has towards death; of how it's altered their life style or changed their perspective or whatever they wish to express. Most songs I've heard describe the bitter mourning one has to a lost loved one, and the ambiance given off is the same. It puts the listener into a depressed mood, they suddenly feel for the musician, they depict them. Just as if the loss was one of their very own.
I imagine that is just what the musician is trying to do. To have their audience better understand whats hurting them, and to make their audience feel them same hurt, because those who do hurt want others to hurt as well. Like its not fair if only they are having a miserable time. For some reason it is alleviating to them. Which is a bit of ironic; to make someone else upset to make yourself feel better.
However I do know that not all feel in such a way. I do know that yes, some can grieve and feel the suffering just as the others, but also enjoy life its self. Some can have an amiable view on death. Like it's a peaceful thing and they accept the fact that it does happen. That everyone does have to feel the hurt of it, but they can still get through it. Like being optimistic is the appropriate action to take during the time of loss. Which can be a hard thing to do, but undoubtedly possible.
I found a band who do take a bit of a positive view on death, (also introduced to me by my cousin) The Microphones sing a song "I can't believe you actually died". Their song reflects the sort of shock they feel because of death, but they still take it as a consolatory thing and I find what they have to say overwhelmingly true. Have a listen.
I imagine that is just what the musician is trying to do. To have their audience better understand whats hurting them, and to make their audience feel them same hurt, because those who do hurt want others to hurt as well. Like its not fair if only they are having a miserable time. For some reason it is alleviating to them. Which is a bit of ironic; to make someone else upset to make yourself feel better.
However I do know that not all feel in such a way. I do know that yes, some can grieve and feel the suffering just as the others, but also enjoy life its self. Some can have an amiable view on death. Like it's a peaceful thing and they accept the fact that it does happen. That everyone does have to feel the hurt of it, but they can still get through it. Like being optimistic is the appropriate action to take during the time of loss. Which can be a hard thing to do, but undoubtedly possible.
I found a band who do take a bit of a positive view on death, (also introduced to me by my cousin) The Microphones sing a song "I can't believe you actually died". Their song reflects the sort of shock they feel because of death, but they still take it as a consolatory thing and I find what they have to say overwhelmingly true. Have a listen.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Hunky Dory
Today is David Bowie's 62nd birthday.
This may come as a shock to most, considering the generation I am a part of, but I sincerely love David Bowie. True, he is an odd character, one can tell that just be his appearance, but it's something about his peculiarity that I am drawn to.
It is weird, that I find such joy in this man's music. But there is something about his instrumental accumulation, his up beat lyrics, his friendly voice- the combination is one that I yearn for, in down times especially. More so recognizable in the 70's, but he has been a rock sensation since the late 60's and well into the 90's. He is weird, I know that. And I know there really isn't another way to describe him. Perhaps he would prefer the term eccentric, odd, maybe even bizarre, but nevertheless, they are all words of abnormal character- which is exactly David Bowie.
For those of you who are reading this and can't recall the name David Bowie, let me give you a little background information...
First off he was born on January 8, 1947 in London. (Maybe that's another factor to my small obsession, I have a thing for British musicians.) And was a part of a few British bands in the mid sixties. I have to admit, I don't think I've heard much of his music that was produced then, but now I feel obligated to look into it. I do know of his music after he decided to go solo though- "space oddity" in the year 1969. (ironically enough, also the year that America landed on the moon.) He has had many top hits, from 1969 to 1999. This is includes "changes" and "golden years". David Bowie was greatly inspired by the whole space theme, and made quite a trend of it. From his music to his style, he was undoubtedly original.
This may come as a shock to most, considering the generation I am a part of, but I sincerely love David Bowie. True, he is an odd character, one can tell that just be his appearance, but it's something about his peculiarity that I am drawn to.
It is weird, that I find such joy in this man's music. But there is something about his instrumental accumulation, his up beat lyrics, his friendly voice- the combination is one that I yearn for, in down times especially. More so recognizable in the 70's, but he has been a rock sensation since the late 60's and well into the 90's. He is weird, I know that. And I know there really isn't another way to describe him. Perhaps he would prefer the term eccentric, odd, maybe even bizarre, but nevertheless, they are all words of abnormal character- which is exactly David Bowie.
For those of you who are reading this and can't recall the name David Bowie, let me give you a little background information...
First off he was born on January 8, 1947 in London. (Maybe that's another factor to my small obsession, I have a thing for British musicians.) And was a part of a few British bands in the mid sixties. I have to admit, I don't think I've heard much of his music that was produced then, but now I feel obligated to look into it. I do know of his music after he decided to go solo though- "space oddity" in the year 1969. (ironically enough, also the year that America landed on the moon.) He has had many top hits, from 1969 to 1999. This is includes "changes" and "golden years". David Bowie was greatly inspired by the whole space theme, and made quite a trend of it. From his music to his style, he was undoubtedly original.
These pictures are more the mid 70's rather than the early 70's, but great representations of David Bowie's incomparable style.
Some of my favorites are from the seventies. One album that I truly adore is Hunky Dory which came out in the year 1971. It includes the infamous track "changes" and a couple of my personal favorites "oh! you pretty things" and "kooks". My cousin gave me the album for my birthday quite a few years ago, and it still remains beloved in my collection of music.
His song "golden years" is the epitome of what a 70's song should be. I think anyways. It's ideal, everything about it screams 70's, which would make sense since it came out in 1975, but still... I think David Bowie hit the nail on the head with that song, making it a classic till this day. Here, listen for yourself, and then try to tell me it does not sound like the representation of the 70's era. I doubt you will be able to achieve such a thing without lying to yourself.
David Bowie performed this song on the show Soul Train which was a primarily black musician show at the time. Bowie was one of the first white people to perform and when doing so, he played his song "golden years." The video above is his performance on Soul Train.....
EnJoY! :)
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
ugh
I give up. My computer is taking a turn for the worst, and simply not wanting to save any of the work that I must be wasting my time on, considering it will not save. Blogger included in this act. Let's just say while trying to post my last blog it came up as an error and when I clicked to go back, only the first paragraph remained of my lengthy entry. I'm aggravated by these doings. Arguh. I suppose everything happens for a reason, no matter how much time and effort I put into something, if it's not meant to be then it will not be.
Friday, January 2, 2009
artists and passion, but mostly passion
art⋅ist
–noun
1.a person who produces works in any of the arts that are primarily subject to aesthetic criteria.
2.a person who practices one of the fine arts, esp. a painter or sculptor.
3.a person whose trade or profession requires a knowledge of design, drawing, painting, etc.: a commercial artist.
4.a person who works in one of the performing arts, as an actor, musician, or singer; a public performer: a mime artist; an artist of the dance.
5.a person whose work exhibits exceptional skill.
pas⋅sion
–noun
1.any powerful or compelling emotion or feeling, as love or hate.
2.strong amorous feeling or desire; love; ardor.
6.a strong or extravagant fondness, enthusiasm, or desire for anything: a passion for music.
7.the object of such a fondness or desire
8.an outburst of strong emotion or feeling: He suddenly broke into a passion of bitter words.
9.violent anger.
10.the state of being acted upon or affected by something external, esp. something alien to one's nature or one's customary behavior.
There are several ways that one can define "artist". But I personally think it all comes down one common ground, which is a reflection of passion. Passion is an intense emotion, it's a drive, almost an uncontrollable force. It is the work of perfectionists. Like the little voice inside ones head saying no such thing as ones best, one can always do better. Which is true. If you're passionate about something, there is no turning back, its a go big or go home situation, otherwise why even bother?
The word passion I believe is used too lightly. Of course it's used to display a strong sense of emotion, to get a dramatic point across. But I believe that it is a word shouldn't be taken half-heartedly. It's a deep word, used to describe deep people. Artists are by nature, emotional and sensitive beings- I'm sure if an artist showed you a collection or portfolio of theirs, and labeled it as something they were passionate about, and you, the insignificant bystander didn't take it as being as in depth as it should- would sincerely hurt the artist. That last sentence was sloppy. What I am trying to define is that the word passion is of ones who are passionate- who put heart into their work, no matter what sort of work it is. And when one is passionate about something, it is difficult to put aside feelings, especially when one does not take them, or their work, for being genuine.
Being proud can be an outcome of passion though. Spending infinite amounts of time and energy in to one specific thing is a side affect of passion I would say. You enjoy the thing you're passionate about, and you come to the conclusion that it is worth it, the time and energy you spend in that one thing. However, maybe being passionate about something fails to reveal a specific purpose. WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS? Its something you must ask yourself before spending the prolonged time and commitment. On the other hand though, your response may be WHY NOT?
Why not put effort into something you enjoy, even if it represents no ideal purpose for its being?
Why not give yourself the opportunity to be proud? I know from personal experience that when you're proud of something, its difficult to compose ones self when others don't appreciate your work for what you believe its worth. But if you're proud of it, then what else matters really? One doesn't take part in an activity of passion for another. I believe that is not the correct motive for passion. It should be for ones self. For the joy of completing something that you have spent endless amounts of time into and loving the outcome. That is what I would believe is classified as passion.
–noun
1.a person who produces works in any of the arts that are primarily subject to aesthetic criteria.
2.a person who practices one of the fine arts, esp. a painter or sculptor.
3.a person whose trade or profession requires a knowledge of design, drawing, painting, etc.: a commercial artist.
4.a person who works in one of the performing arts, as an actor, musician, or singer; a public performer: a mime artist; an artist of the dance.
5.a person whose work exhibits exceptional skill.
pas⋅sion
–noun
1.any powerful or compelling emotion or feeling, as love or hate.
2.strong amorous feeling or desire; love; ardor.
6.a strong or extravagant fondness, enthusiasm, or desire for anything: a passion for music.
7.the object of such a fondness or desire
8.an outburst of strong emotion or feeling: He suddenly broke into a passion of bitter words.
9.violent anger.
10.the state of being acted upon or affected by something external, esp. something alien to one's nature or one's customary behavior.
There are several ways that one can define "artist". But I personally think it all comes down one common ground, which is a reflection of passion. Passion is an intense emotion, it's a drive, almost an uncontrollable force. It is the work of perfectionists. Like the little voice inside ones head saying no such thing as ones best, one can always do better. Which is true. If you're passionate about something, there is no turning back, its a go big or go home situation, otherwise why even bother?
The word passion I believe is used too lightly. Of course it's used to display a strong sense of emotion, to get a dramatic point across. But I believe that it is a word shouldn't be taken half-heartedly. It's a deep word, used to describe deep people. Artists are by nature, emotional and sensitive beings- I'm sure if an artist showed you a collection or portfolio of theirs, and labeled it as something they were passionate about, and you, the insignificant bystander didn't take it as being as in depth as it should- would sincerely hurt the artist. That last sentence was sloppy. What I am trying to define is that the word passion is of ones who are passionate- who put heart into their work, no matter what sort of work it is. And when one is passionate about something, it is difficult to put aside feelings, especially when one does not take them, or their work, for being genuine.
Being proud can be an outcome of passion though. Spending infinite amounts of time and energy in to one specific thing is a side affect of passion I would say. You enjoy the thing you're passionate about, and you come to the conclusion that it is worth it, the time and energy you spend in that one thing. However, maybe being passionate about something fails to reveal a specific purpose. WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS? Its something you must ask yourself before spending the prolonged time and commitment. On the other hand though, your response may be WHY NOT?
Why not put effort into something you enjoy, even if it represents no ideal purpose for its being?
Why not give yourself the opportunity to be proud? I know from personal experience that when you're proud of something, its difficult to compose ones self when others don't appreciate your work for what you believe its worth. But if you're proud of it, then what else matters really? One doesn't take part in an activity of passion for another. I believe that is not the correct motive for passion. It should be for ones self. For the joy of completing something that you have spent endless amounts of time into and loving the outcome. That is what I would believe is classified as passion.
reading
I love reading. Reading things that interest me anyway. It's the ideal escape for me. I can go anywhere at any time and be any one. I do have a weakness when it comes to reading though, I tend to be somewhat obsessive. Once I start something that captures my interest, I become consumed by it, until I am content. Rarely is it ever just a moiety, no, I usually refuse to cease until I have completed the entire piece. Whether it's 5 or 500 pages. I simply do not have the control to stop. However, when I do finish, there's always a feeling of dolefulness. My little high vanishes. There is no longer anything to anticipate, to be eager for. There is an emptiness that has developed. Instead of fulfilling the hole, it only expands it. The ending of my new acquisition though, affects my reaction. Not always am I so depressed over the fact that the story has ended. Sometimes I feel as though I was walk away with a new perception on something, or start to generate new and original ideas of my own. Maybe even a sense of relief that everything has at last, come to a conclusion. But not a concrete conclusion leaves me aggravated. I don't like being left with lots of questions. It makes me unsound. Like there is something missing. It's ridiculous, I know. To get so wrapped up something that technically does not exist. To let my emotions be affected by a segment of fictional literature. I can't help but hold on to a fragment of hope that it is real. That soon enough, my little story will be recorded and dispersed through out the country for others to enjoy. That would be cool for me, to become a writer such as the ones I appreciate. To have people adore my thoughts and views as if I were someone of importance.
That's what I believe makes me want to read. I admire those who can, and those who are successful at it. A hint of jealousy perhaps, but not nearly enough to prevent me of taking delight in other's work. I like things that make me think. Not so much that I am in circles and my brain hurts and I still don't have an understanding, but something that expands my traditional thought process. I love getting other people's opinions as well, and hearing things that they love to consume their brain with. Trying new things is always something that I take part in though.
Fictional stories are a favorite of mine. More so realistic fiction. I've tried reading some fantasy and science fiction, but I'm not particularly a fan. I like poetry a lot. It's something that has meaning and makes me think a little bit. I love reading old English as well. Shakespeare and Montaigne are two I relish in trying to interpret. They aren't ones that I could read all the time, but in small doses they can be a pleasure. I assume it's because I am fascinated by things I don't know of, or little about. However I don't like going too in depth with such things. I have a short attention span, especially when it comes to learning. I know that the idea of a short attention span can be controlled, but that is a skill that I have yet to obtain.
I can't fathom the idea of being illiterate. I suppose it would be like trying to read a foreign language, which I can imagine, is frustrating. To really think about reading, and how we do it blows me away. How did I all of a sudden be able to glance at a magazine cover and know what it consists of. And how reading is used all the time every single day. From text messaging to following directions to some one's house. In this society, it seems simply impossible to survive if one is unable to read. And for whatever reason, I am currently full of abundant thanks to my grade school teachers for helping me become acceptable in society. I don't remember going through it, the learning to read process I mean. Or looking at a sentence and having no idea where to even start with trying to tackle it. I do remember learning to spell thought, which is something I continue to do almost everyday. That's besides the point of reading though.
It's just incredible I think, that something as reading can be used as entertainment or education. Two things that some may consider exact opposites. At this moment, I am just glad that I can read, for whatever purpose needed, I'm just capable of it.
That's what I believe makes me want to read. I admire those who can, and those who are successful at it. A hint of jealousy perhaps, but not nearly enough to prevent me of taking delight in other's work. I like things that make me think. Not so much that I am in circles and my brain hurts and I still don't have an understanding, but something that expands my traditional thought process. I love getting other people's opinions as well, and hearing things that they love to consume their brain with. Trying new things is always something that I take part in though.
Fictional stories are a favorite of mine. More so realistic fiction. I've tried reading some fantasy and science fiction, but I'm not particularly a fan. I like poetry a lot. It's something that has meaning and makes me think a little bit. I love reading old English as well. Shakespeare and Montaigne are two I relish in trying to interpret. They aren't ones that I could read all the time, but in small doses they can be a pleasure. I assume it's because I am fascinated by things I don't know of, or little about. However I don't like going too in depth with such things. I have a short attention span, especially when it comes to learning. I know that the idea of a short attention span can be controlled, but that is a skill that I have yet to obtain.
I can't fathom the idea of being illiterate. I suppose it would be like trying to read a foreign language, which I can imagine, is frustrating. To really think about reading, and how we do it blows me away. How did I all of a sudden be able to glance at a magazine cover and know what it consists of. And how reading is used all the time every single day. From text messaging to following directions to some one's house. In this society, it seems simply impossible to survive if one is unable to read. And for whatever reason, I am currently full of abundant thanks to my grade school teachers for helping me become acceptable in society. I don't remember going through it, the learning to read process I mean. Or looking at a sentence and having no idea where to even start with trying to tackle it. I do remember learning to spell thought, which is something I continue to do almost everyday. That's besides the point of reading though.
It's just incredible I think, that something as reading can be used as entertainment or education. Two things that some may consider exact opposites. At this moment, I am just glad that I can read, for whatever purpose needed, I'm just capable of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)